I am writing in reply to your recent letter, in which you ask that I
withdraw my criticism of the CBC's Mideast coverage.

Many Canadians are still struggling to comprehend how Chief David Ahenakew
could have spoken approvingly of Hitler and the Holocaust. Their
understanding has not been helped by the media, who've largely failed to
explain the context -- a speech in which he had just blamed Jews for the
Second World War and, by "killing Arabs," an eventual third one.

I understand this is a serious charge, and am prepared to debate in a
mutually agreed forum if you disagree.

Let me be specific. Our government's decision to name Hezbollah a
"terrorist" organization was inevitable, once the UN certified Israel's
withdrawal from Lebanon was "complete," and the United States added them to
its "A-team." Yet, your reporter claims it was an "intensely political
decision" because these pioneers of suicide attacks can be viewed as a
"national liberation movement."

Another -- apparently infected with the same conspiracy virus as Ahenakew --
referred darkly to a "Jewish lobby" using "pressure tactics" (a press
conference and a lawsuit, standard fare in Ottawa). Shame on the CBC.

Shame on you, personally, for resorting to similarly crude stereotypes to
dismiss critics.

Shame on you, personally, for resorting to similarly crude stereotypes to
dismiss critics. In newspapers available daily in Toronto, you'll find
articles by Jews who share your view of the Mideast conflict, and by
non-Jews who believe you are hopeless apologists for the Palestinians.

Relying on the CBC ombudsman to certify your coverage is akin to Jean
Chrétien citing Howard Wilson to defend his Shawinigan shenanigans.

By 2001, even beat reporters drawing paychecks from the public broadcaster
began ridiculing that position. Having observed PMO-CBC relations from a
front-row seat, I appreciate they must sometimes walk on eggshells --
especially with nothing but perpetual Liberal government on the horizon. How
empowering it must be for a journalist to be far away from the powerful
people who today vote your budget and tomorrow might offer you a job. Freed
from incessant demands for fairness, free to pursue a political agenda other
than the government's.

The CBC's consistently negative presentation of Israel -- a country where
minefields are not a bureaucratic problem, and that has its few good points
along with the bad -- is, in part, a consequence of sending reporters who
lack Hebrew. Even a senior reporter like Neil Macdonald, in my experience
though understandably not yours, normally lags behind news freely available
on radio and the Internet. And, the linguistic gap perhaps explains why --
despite the expense of maintaining a foreign bureau -- he rarely reports on
Israel's medical, cultural, scientific and technological achievements.

Your correspondent deserves praise, on the other hand, for studying Arabic,
which is not easy to acquire. It's curious, therefore, that Macdonald has
not reported more frequently from Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Syria -- in
carrying out his self-described mandate of "holding what's going on up to
the mirror of Canadian values." Nor have we heard much about Syria's de
facto occupation of Lebanon.

The toxicity of this double standard on democracy and human rights is
compounded by the frequent omission of context from his reports.

Recently, Macdonald presented a Hamas spokesperson who vowed to continue
attacks "as long as there is occupation." Believe me, and despite how it may
look to you and other senior managers in Toronto, this guy is no Nelson
Mandela.

The New York Times routinely explains that by ending "occupation" he means
eliminating the Jewish state; had your correspondent done likewise, and
noted the widespread public support beyond Hamas for "liberating all of
Palestine," Ahenakew would understand why Israel is "killing Arabs."

The CBC's sins of commission are also noxious in minds of this ilk, judging
from the volume of e-mails I receive that refer to "Judeo-Nazis," the
"Israeli SS" perpetrating a Holocaust and Ariel Sharon -- of whom I'm no fan
-- as another Hitler.

Describing a recent shooting of Israelis, for example, Macdonald
appropriately notes the long history of violence in Hebron; in an aside, he
mentions the horrific 1994 murder of 29 Arabs by Dr. Baruch Goldstein.

He could also have reasonably alluded to the brutal slaughter of Jews in
1921, 1929 and 1936 by determined opponents of the establishment of any
Jewish state, of whatever size. But these enormities don't fit CBC's
prejudices -- of Jews as "settlers" having no business being in Hebron, and
of the conflict being about "armed Palestinians battling the Israeli
occupation." It would also suggest that, while an independent state is
necessary for peace, it might not be sufficient -- as president Bill Clinton
learned at Camp David.

Still, and though it is a criminal offence under anti-terror laws for anyone
to assist Hamas (punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment), you argue that
viewers should be allowed to make up their own minds. We're talking about
blowing up teenagers at discos, mind you -- "crimes against humanity,"
according to Human Rights Watch. Presumably your open-mindedness extends to
young viewers -- potential recruits like Omar Khadr or a Canadian John
Walker Lindh. Fortunately, that's not CBC's approach to rape, armed robbery
and other lesser crimes -- or even toward legal, though harmful, substances
like tobacco.

Aside from being irresponsible and amoral, your failure to call Hamas a
terrorist organization betrays another double standard. When the blood on
the sidewalk is Israeli it's one thing, when American it's another. It was
an error, you say, for the CBC initially to call the Sept. 11 attacks
"terrorism." A fortuitous error, I'd say, considering the likely reaction at
the border had you referred to al-Qaeda as a "national liberation movement."

Yet, I'll withdraw the allegation, as you demand, if you'll provide examples
where David Halton spouts that Orwellian line, even now after emotions have
cooled. Nor do viewers find him regularly challenging from Washington the
appropriateness of calling the 9/11 Saudi hijackers "terrorists" -- as you
regularly do regarding their Hamas brethren. As journalists, you should be
ashamed for covering up their ideological kinship by censoring bin Laden's
messages.

Ironically, it's in the name of professional standards that you reject the
word "terrorism." You insist the CBC must not adopt the terminology of
either side. Say what? We must be watching different channels, if not in
different languages. Because, while I sometimes agree with your
terminological choices, it's clear that the CBC, like the Tower of Pisa,
always leans in one direction.

Your reporters do not leave viewers to decide whether curfews are
self-defense measures; they unambiguously refer to "collective punishment,"
the Palestinian term and a crime under the Geneva Conventions. You call
Israel's targeted killings, though not the recent U.S. one in Yemen,
"assassinations" -- an honorific used by Palestinian spokespersons but not
normally conferred by CBC on any mass murderers, other than, it appears,
those who send bombers to blow up babies in Jerusalem pizzerias. Your
correspondents refer to the "occupation" and to the West Bank and Gaza as
"occupied Palestinian land," not as disputed territory. And they call
Israeli communities "settlements" and their residents "settlers."

Interestingly, you never mention that even these Israelis -- as do
Palestinians -- have a stronger claim than my neighbors who've settled on
aboriginal lands in British Columbia. Fortunately, your reporters don't
bring home the thinly veiled code they use to "explain" why Israeli
school kids are blown up by Hamas "militants."

That's what CBC in Montreal normally calls political party members, not
murderers, and it's no wonder some viewers may be wondering why Israel is
killing Arabs. Unless they've read a recent report by Human Rights Watch
that appears to have escaped Macdonald's attention. It states unambiguously
that nothing -- not settlements, not occupation -- justifies Hamas' "crimes
against humanity." They've also concluded that Yasser Arafat is "politically
responsible" and I'm still waiting for a Newsworld program to balance last
year's one-hour indictment of Ariel Sharon as a war criminal.

I also challenge you to produce, in writing, the longstanding "policy" you
claim to be implementing. Even your less-than-independent ombudsman says:
"There is nothing in CBC's journalism policy that prevents the public
broadcaster's journalists from calling a spade a spade or a terror attack a
terror attack."

Innocent Canadians were incinerated in the Twin Towers and in Bali. Today --
young and old, at home and abroad-- we are all considered legitimate targets
by al-Qaeda. In my book that's terrorism, and I'm frankly appalled that the
guy calling the shots at Canada's national broadcasting service believes
it's an error to call these murderers what they are.

Related Articles:

About the Author

Norman Spector, Canada's former ambassador to Israel and the Palestinian
Authority, served as chief of staff to Brian Mulroney. His book, Chronicle
of a War Foretold: How Mideast Peace Became America's Fight, will be
published by Douglas and McIntyre next month.

Visitor Comments: 6

(6)
brenda,
November 17, 2011 12:13 AM

I agree with the article too!

I love many of the CBC's special investigative news stories from around the world. I find it thought provoking and makes one think. However I find the stories regarding Israel not accurate and they like many others spout off untruths. CBC and other news agencies must dig deeper to get both sides of this very long historical issue. War is not pleasant to say the least and attacks and killings are very sad. If Israel messes up and it is truly not legal then report it..and you must do that kind of reporting about the other side as well. I find that there is quite an extreme bias against Israel. I hope CBC and others news agencies will do a complete balanced story and do it justice. I thank you for your time and hope the changes will come soon.

(5)
Anonymous,
April 16, 2003 12:00 AM

CBC News

Here is an email I sent to the CBC Ombudsman and his reponse.

Dear Mr. Muenz,

I write to acknowledge receipt of your communication, which I have

shared with Mary Sheppard, Chief Producer of CBC News Online, along with

the request that your concerns be addressed.

Yours truly,

David Bazay

Ombudsman

>>> George Muenz 15/04/03 2:42:39 PM >>>

Once again, CBC goes to great lengths to portray

Israel in a negative light, and right up there after

news about Iraq, chose to highlight and publish a UN

report on Israels record on Human Rights. One has to

read the article to see that "Israel is regularly

condemned by the 53-nation Commission, which is

chaired this year by Libya's U.N. Ambassador"

It also states that this report is initiated by Arab

and African nations and we all know how tolerant and

respectful of human rights they are.

Given CBCs coverage of Israel in the past few years,

we know that this article is DELIBARATELY selected to

be a headline. I don't deny that CBC has the right to

publish this information, but the headline should have

read differently. It should have said something like:

"Led by Libyas UN Ambassador, and initiated by Arab

and African nations, the UN Human Rights Commission

released a report on Israels human rights record."

Unlike Canada, Israel has never taken all of it's Arab

population and moved them into camps which Canada did

to the Japanese in WWII even though Canada was not at

war with Japan and these people posed no threat. You

however do feel that you have some kind of moral high

ground in which to criticize Israel which is faced

with extreme danger every day.

I am ashamed and disgusted with the CBC!

George Muenz

Vancouver, BC

(4)
Aston Kwok,
February 24, 2003 12:00 AM

I see where you're coming from

Thanks for the article. I also feel the coverage of Middle East has been increasingly biased against Israel, ignoring her legitimate needs to provide security for her citizens.

(3)
Lydia Roussel,
January 17, 2003 12:00 AM

Biais... news

I totally agree with you that CBC has been less than neutral in their presentation of world event, it being Israel-Palestine conflict or elsewhere. It would be refreshing to have news cast that just gives us what happen without using sementic and syntax to alter our point of view. Thank you for telling them what you saw.
Lydia

(2)
Eli Feldman,
January 13, 2003 12:00 AM

News Reporters!!! Are you joking

CBC has always been on the forefront of anti-Jewish views and columns, and as long as they are able to market that line of rhetoric, they'll continue to do so. Israel, on the other hand can do quite a bit more to hinder these ultra leftist (so called) journalists who sit securely in Israel whilst at the same time spewing filth and lies on the only bastion of democracy in the entire Middle East. These (phony) journalists from CBC, BBC, AP and the rest of these LOSERS do not need to be on the front lines with the IDF they despise, these nincompoops shouldn't be allowed to travel wherever the IDF is involved in defensive actions against the enemy. The Israeli government can and should restrict these Reporters from the front lines by simply making these areas 'Closed Millitary Zones' and let them do their 'so called' reporting from their hotel rooms in Jerusalem and not from the front lines like they did in Jenin. Who, do you think is responsible for the Jenin massacre lies if not journalists. Does anyone for one moment think if these news reporters were sitting in Jericho or Gaza or some other area under Palestinian rule would they dare to report on PLO or Hamas atrocities against innocent Israeli's, of course not, their lives would be jeopardized, if they did, and they know that. In Israel though, not only do they report but they additionally, input their anti-Israel, anti-Semitic views, feelings and exaggerations to portray Israel as a villain. The least we can do is restrict them from the front lines. That much we owe the IDF and the People of Israel

(1)
charlie macdonald,
January 13, 2003 12:00 AM

I totally aggree with this article

I am no longer proud to be a Canadian, because of this and many other issues. As for the news I only watch CNN. I don't have time for CBC.

I'm told that it's a mitzvah to become intoxicated on Purim. This puzzles me, because to my understanding, it is not considered a good thing to become intoxicated, period.

One of the characteristics of the at-risk youth is their use of drugs, including alcohol. In my experience, getting drunk doesn't reveal secrets. It makes people act stupid and irresponsible, doing things they would never do if they were sober. Also, I know a lot about the horrible health effects of abusing alcohol, because I work at a research center that focuses on addiction and substance abuse.

Also, I am an alcoholic, which means that if I drink, very bad things happen. I have not had a drink in 22 years, and I have no intention of starting now. Surely there must be instances where a person is excused from the obligation to drink. I don't see how Judaism could ever promote the idea of getting drunk. It just doesn't seem right.

The Aish Rabbi Replies:

Putting aside for a moment all the spiritual and philosophical reasons for getting drunk on Purim, this remains an issue of common sense. Of course, teenagers should be warned of the dangers of acute alcohol ingestion. Of course, nobody should drink and drive. Of course, nobody should become so drunk to the point of negligence in performing mitzvot. And of course, a recovering alcoholic should not partake of alcohol on Purim.

Indeed, the Code of Jewish Law explicitly says that if one suspects the drinking may affect him negatively, then he should NOT drink.

Getting drunk on Purim is actually one of the most difficult mitzvot to do correctly. A person should only drink if it will lead to positive spiritual results - e.g. under the loosening affect of the alcohol, greater awareness will surface of the love for God and Torah found deep in the heart. (Perhaps if we were on a higher spiritual level, we wouldn't need to get drunk!)

Yet the Talmud still speaks of an obligation on Purim of "not knowing the difference between Blessed is Mordechai and Cursed is Haman." How then should a person who doesn't drink get the point of “not knowing”? Simple - just go to sleep! (Rama - OC 695:2)

All this applies to individuals. But the question remains - does drinking on Purim adversely affect the collective social health of the Jewish community?

The aversion to alcoholism is engrained into Jewish consciousness from a number of Biblical and Talmudic sources. There are the rebuking words of prophets - Isaiah 28:1, Hosea 3:1 with Rashi, and Amos 6:6, and the Zohar says that "The wicked stray after wine" (Midrash Ne'alam Parshat Vayera).

It is well known that the rate of alcoholism among Jews has historically been very low. Numerous medical, psychological and sociological studies have confirmed this. The connection between Judaism and sobriety is so evident, that the following conversation is reported by Lawrence Kelemen in "Permission to Receive":

When Dr. Mark Keller, editor of the Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, commented that "practically all Jews do drink, and yet all the world knows that Jews hardly ever become alcoholics," his colleague, Dr. Howard Haggard, director of Yale's Laboratory of Applied Physiology, jokingly proposed converting alcoholics to the Jewish religion in order to immerse them in a culture with healthy attitudes toward drinking!

Perhaps we could suggest that it is precisely because of the use of alcohol in traditional ceremonies (Kiddush, Bris, Purim, etc.), that Jews experience such low rates of alcoholism. This ceremonial usage may actually act like an inoculation - i.e. injecting a safe amount that keeps the disease away.

Of course, as we said earlier, all this needs to be monitored with good common sense. Yet in my personal experience - having been in the company of Torah scholars who were totally drunk on Purim - they acted with extreme gentleness and joy. Amid the Jewish songs and beautiful words of Torah, every year the event is, for me, very special.

Adar 12 marks the dedication of Herod's renovations on the second Holy Temple in Jerusalem in 11 BCE. Herod was king of Judea in the first century BCE who constructed grand projects like the fortresses at Masada and Herodium, the city of Caesarea, and fortifications around the old city of Jerusalem. The most ambitious of Herod's projects was the re-building of the Temple, which was in disrepair after standing over 300 years. Herod's renovations included a huge man-made platform that remains today the largest man-made platform in the world. It took 10,000 men 10 years just to build the retaining walls around the Temple Mount; the Western Wall that we know today is part of that retaining wall. The Temple itself was a phenomenal site, covered in gold and marble. As the Talmud says, "He who has not seen Herod's building, has never in his life seen a truly grand building."

Some people gauge the value of themselves by what they own. But in reality, the entire concept of ownership of possessions is based on an illusion. When you obtain a material object, it does not become part of you. Ownership is merely your right to use specific objects whenever you wish.

How unfortunate is the person who has an ambition to cleave to something impossible to cleave to! Such a person will not obtain what he desires and will experience suffering.

Fortunate is the person whose ambition it is to acquire personal growth that is independent of external factors. Such a person will lead a happy and rewarding life.

With exercising patience you could have saved yourself 400 zuzim (Berachos 20a).

This Talmudic proverb arose from a case where someone was fined 400 zuzim because he acted in undue haste and insulted some one.

I was once pulling into a parking lot. Since I was a bit late for an important appointment, I was terribly annoyed that the lead car in the procession was creeping at a snail's pace. The driver immediately in front of me was showing his impatience by sounding his horn. In my aggravation, I wanted to join him, but I saw no real purpose in adding to the cacophony.

When the lead driver finally pulled into a parking space, I saw a wheelchair symbol on his rear license plate. He was handicapped and was obviously in need of the nearest parking space. I felt bad that I had harbored such hostile feelings about him, but was gratified that I had not sounded my horn, because then I would really have felt guilty for my lack of consideration.

This incident has helped me to delay my reactions to other frustrating situations until I have more time to evaluate all the circumstances. My motives do not stem from lofty principles, but from my desire to avoid having to feel guilt and remorse for having been foolish or inconsiderate.

Today I shall...

try to withhold impulsive reaction, bearing in mind that a hasty act performed without full knowledge of all the circumstances may cause me much distress.

With stories and insights,
Rabbi Twerski's new book Twerski on Machzor makes Rosh Hashanah prayers more meaningful. Click here to order...